Ms Lira Constructions Private Limited vs. The Union Territory Of Chandigarh

Held

The Court held that the issue raised in the present writ petition was squarely covered by its previous judgments in Luxmi Traders (supra) and The Amar Cooperative LC Society Ltd (supra). Consequently, the writ petition was disposed of in the same terms as those prior judgments. The reasoning implies that the Court's prior decisions established the legal position on whether uploading documents on the GST portal constitutes proper service under the relevant sections of the GST Act. The ratio decidendi would be that for proper service under Section 169 read with Section 146 of the GST Act, 2017, mere uploading on the portal's 'View Additional Notices and Orders' tab may not suffice, and the specific findings of the cited judgments would govern. The operative direction was to dispose of the writ petition in line with the aforementioned precedents.

Facts

The petitioner, M/S Lira Constructions Private Limited, filed a writ petition before the High Court of Punjab and Haryana challenging the validity of service of a notice and an order-in-original. The revenue, represented by the Union Territory of Chandigarh and others, was the respondent. The core of the dispute revolved around whether uploading these documents in the 'View Additional Notices and Orders' tab on the common GST portal (www.gst.gov.in) constituted proper service on the petitioner, as per Section 169 read with Section 146 of the Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The procedural history indicates this is a writ petition, and the court's decision hinges on prior judgments.

Key Issues

1. Whether uploading a notice and an order-in-original in the 'View Additional Notices and Orders' tab on the common portal (www.gst.gov.in) amounts to proper service on the petitioner under Section 169 read with Section 146 of the Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017? The petitioner contended that such uploading does not constitute proper service. The revenue did not present any specific arguments, but the court noted that the parties were 'ad idem' (in agreement) that the issue was no longer res integra (undecided) and had been concluded by previous judgments of the High Court. Specifically, the court referred to its own prior decisions in CWP-27139-2025, Luxmi Traders v. Union Territory of Chandigarh and Others, and CWP-15601-2026, The Amar Cooperative LC Society Ltd. v. State of Haryana and Others, decided on 23.07.2026.